Another Which Camera Thread, D5000 Vs. T1i

[Atlas77]

Ive already made a couple "which camera" threads. and yet I still cant decide. Ive gone from wanting the D3000 to D5000 to D90 and all over the place.

I realized my dream of the D90 has fallen short, I just cant afford a nice lens and a D90, so im giving up the better body for a better lens.

Im planning to buy a body then buy a seperate lens. However I just cant choose which body to buy, Ive read "vs." articles. Looked at vs. specs and just about everything else.

The D5000 has less megapixels yet its a faster camera. But the T1i/500D has a better movie mode.

Which one should I chose? Im thinking of doing this the classic way and walking into the store and holding both in my hands and deciding on that because thats what many people say to do for advice on TPF.

 

[Derrel]

An in-store, side-by-side, hands-on comparison of two competing camera models is a time honored manner of helping arrive at a decision. One of the MOST difficult problems is over-fixating on a specific feature or couple of features or a couple of particular specifications. A lot of times, people will do research on a camera and convince themselves that feature X, or feature Y is a really essential feature. But, alas, a camera is more than the sum of its parts,and is much more than the specification list.

Fit,feel,and finish are impossible to ascertain from the printed word. An actual hands-on evaluation ought to make your decision much easier than shopping by specifications or on-line reviews.

I'm not that in-tune with the T1i or the D5000 really.

 

[ssnxp]

I was very indicisive as well for a long time; eventually I spent some quality time with the D5000, D90, T1i, and 50D. Personally, the fit/feel of Canon cameras just do it for me. They just feel more comfortable, but that's all personal preference.

Absolutely go into the store and get your hands on the cameras, even if you don't plan on buying it in the store. "Hands on" time is what did it for me.

 

[BlackWolF]

My problem is not so much which model ... my problem is choosing between Nikon or Canon ... Nikon looks better (in my humble opinion) but I think Canon has better lenses ... Oh dear, such difficult decisions ... Keep in mind I am a beginning amateur (as in new hobby) ... So I do want to start of with something that will give me the satisfaction that I have chosen a good new hobby ... But I know, it is hard to make a choice ... I did see that the Nikon D3000 has that "new" guide thing, which is supposed to help beginning photographers ... but how good would that be in the long run ... Good advice is expensive is what my dad always said and I think he was right ... No matter the advice I get from other people here on the forum, ultimately it will have to be my decision anyway ... but ANY advice would be welcome

 

[inTempus]

If cost is a concern and you crave nice lenses, Canon will be a good choice. Nikon's lenses can cost upwards of 25% or more than the competing Canon lens. Here's an example.

A very popular lens is the 24-70. The Nikon lens will cost you $1799. The Canon lens will cost you $1,299. That $500 difference will go a long way towards another nice lens.

Both makers offer great bodies, it's a matter of finding which one suits your needs. At the D3000/5000 and T1i level, they're pretty evenly matched in terms of performance. Just keep in mind that not all of the affordable Nikkor lenses will work with those bodies 100% (most notably the auto focus system). Here's a list of lenses that will/won't work with the bodies:

AF-S or AF-I: All functions supported.
• Type G or D AF NIKKOR without built-in autofocus motor: All functions except autofocus supported. IX NIKKOR lenses not supported.
• Other AF NIKKOR: All functions supported except autofocus and 3D color matrix metering II. Lenses for F3AF not supported.
• Type D PC NIKKOR: All functions supported except autofocus and some shooting modes.
• AI-P NIKKOR: All functions supported except autofocus and 3D color matrix metering II.
• Non-CPU: Autofocus not supported. Can be used in mode M, but exposure meter does not function. Electronic rangefinder can be used if lens has a maximum aperture of f/5.6 or faster

With Canon all of the lenses, even the most affordable, will work with autofocus as well.

This isn't an issue for some people and for others it's a big issue. Just be aware that it's something you should consider when looking at the lower end Nikons. If you got the D90 this wouldn't be an issue for you as it has a built in AF motor for use with lenses that lack the motor in the body.

 

[bigtwinky]

... Nikon looks better (in my humble opinion) but I think Canon has better lenses ... Oh dear, such difficult decisions ... Keep in mind I am a beginning amateur (as in new hobby) ...

Not sure how a beginner amateur (someone new to the hobby) can comment on Canon having better lenses.

They may LOOK nicer/better/cleaner/more pro (or they may not), but not sure where you read/saw/where told that Canon had better lenses.

You are right in thinking of the long run. While a "guide thing" (dont know what that is, I dont know the D3000) might seem like something interesting to someone who is new, but the more important thing for someone who is knew is taking the time to understand photography and cameras (composition, aperture, shutter,...). Once you know this stuff, these beginner functions and guide things aren't really used and you find yourself wanting something more advanced, giving you better ISO, full frame, faster shooting or whatever tickles your fancy.

 

[BlackWolF]

Thank you inTempus for that explanation ... much appreciated ...

When I read the other persons comment then I guess as a beginning amateur you can not speak your opinion about lenses or camera's ... too funny ... I guess some people find themselves better then others ... Oh well

 

[PhotoXopher]

Pick up a D5000 and use the controls (whether you know what they are for or not), then pick up a T1i and do the same, which one is more natural to you?

Get that one.

 

[Derrel]

If you want cheap lenses, Canon has plenty of them.

As far as "better" lenses coming from Canon than Nikon, sorry, but think again. The 24-70mm f/2.8 that inTempus referenced above--the Nikon does cost more money,and it's optically a better performer. Same with the Nikon 50mm 1.8 AF-D versus the Canon 50 1.8 EF-II; for a few more dollars, the Nikon is a vastly superior lens.

And, please, let's not get started on the Canon 16-35 L, either the I or the II version or their 17-40 f/4-L; Canon's weakness in wide angle and wide angle zooms is legendary. Canon has long had weaknesses with the important wide zooms like their 16-35 and 28-70 and then their 24-70. But even in the kit lens category, for example the original Canon 18-5 kit lens sold for a few years--that lens was total crap compared with the Nikon lens. Even Nikon's discontinued 17-35 f/2.8 AF-S is a better lens than Canon's current 16-35-L.

Here's an example of why Nikon's higher-grade lenses cost more. Quality and quality control. Professional photographers who want the BEST wide-angle zoom lens,and who use Canon's top-level 1Ds Mark III 21-megapixel camera are eagerly buying an adapter that allows them to use Nikon lenses on their beloved Canon cameras. The Nikon 14-24 on a Canon 1DsIII - A landscapers report.

David's questions, "So why is there no truly impeccable Canon wide angle zooms? Good question and one I can't answer. The 16-35mkII is arguably only slightly better than the 17-40 f4L; for £900 that's a somewhat disappointing upgrade. What's also disappointing is that Canon do not make any exceptional super wide prime's between 15-24mm. Then there is Canon's copy to copy inconsistency,"------Uh-oh, he let out the Canon dark secret-- copy to copy inconsistency....it's Canon users' most commonly experienced problem; poor quality control and extreme variation in focusing, plus optical decentering. Front focusing, back focusing, two of the major issues Canon users complain about. Canon invented AF micro-adjust because a few years ago they were having such huge problems with returned cameras and returned lenses. Go to the larger Canon web forums and search for "front focus" or "back focus", then go to a similar Nikon forum and search on the same terms.

I felt bad for Klaus Schroiff at photozone.de in his efforts to test the anon 70-200 f/2.8 L-IS lens: the first sample was so,so bad its results were not published. A second copy was obtained, and the lens was off so much that it had to be sent back to Canon to be repaired to qualify enough for the testing. So, three tries to get a 70-200 2.8 L-IS fit for testing?

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 USM L IS - Test Report / Review

But, for a beginner considering entry-level lenses, the prices of Canon and Nikon glass is pretty comparable on things like 18-55, 10-20-something ultra wide DX lenses, 17-55 Dx, 55-200 stabilized lenses, and 70-300 stabilized lenses. Prices are also fairly comparable on 70-200 f/2.8 lenses. Some Nikon lenses are lower-cost than comparable Canon lenses, like Nikon's 105mm f/2.8 VR macro lens versus Canon's 100mm f/2.8 IS macro lens; the Canon is significantly more expensive.

 

[BlackWolF]

If you want cheap lenses, Canon has plenty of them.

As far as "better" lenses coming from Canon than Nikon, sorry, but think again. The 24-70mm f/2.8 that inTempus referenced above--the Nikon does cost more money,and it's optically a better performer. Same with the Nikon 50mm 1.8 AF-D versus the Canon 50 1.8 EF-II; for a few more dollars, the Nikon is a vastly superior lens.

And, please, let's not get started on the Canon 16-35 L, either the I or the II version or their 17-40 f/4-L; Canon's weakness in wide angle and wide angle zooms is legendary. Canon has long had weaknesses with the important wide zooms like their 16-35 and 28-70 and then their 24-70. But even in the kit lens category, for example the original Canon 18-5 kit lens sold for a few years--that lens was total crap compared with the Nikon lens. Even Nikon's discontinued 17-35 f/2.8 AF-S is a better lens than Canon's current 16-35-L.

Here's an example of why Nikon's higher-grade lenses cost more. Quality and quality control. Professional photographers who want the BEST wide-angle zoom lens,and who use Canon's top-level 1Ds Mark III 21-megapixel camera are eagerly buying an adapter that allows them to use Nikon lenses on their beloved Canon cameras. The Nikon 14-24 on a Canon 1DsIII - A landscapers report.

David's questions, "So why is there no truly impeccable Canon wide angle zooms? Good question and one I can't answer. The 16-35mkII is arguably only slightly better than the 17-40 f4L; for £900 that's a somewhat disappointing upgrade. What's also disappointing is that Canon do not make any exceptional super wide prime's between 15-24mm. Then there is Canon's copy to copy inconsistency,"------Uh-oh, he let out the Canon dark secret-- copy to copy inconsistency....it's Canon users' most commonly experienced problem; poor quality control and extreme variation in focusing, plus optical decentering. Front focusing, back focusing, two of the major issues Canon users complain about. Canon invented AF micro-adjust because a few years ago they were having such huge problems with returned cameras and returned lenses. Go to the larger Canon web forums and search for "front focus" or "back focus", then go to a similar Nikon forum and search on the same terms.

I felt bad for Klaus Schroiff at photozone.de in his efforts to test the anon 70-200 f/2.8 L-IS lens: the first sample was so,so bad its results were not published. A second copy was obtained, and the lens was off so much that it had to be sent back to Canon to be repaired to qualify enough for the testing. So, three tries to get a 70-200 2.8 L-IS fit for testing?

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 USM L IS - Test Report / Review

But, for a beginner considering entry-level lenses, the prices of Canon and Nikon glass is pretty comparable on things like 18-55, 10-20-something ultra wide DX lenses, 17-55 Dx, 55-200 stabilized lenses, and 70-300 stabilized lenses. Prices are also fairly comparable on 70-200 f/2.8 lenses. Some Nikon lenses are lower-cost than comparable Canon lenses, like Nikon's 105mm f/2.8 VR macro lens versus Canon's 100mm f/2.8 IS macro lens; the Canon is significantly more expensive.

And thank you Derrel for such an in depth explanation ... much appreciated by this "beginning amateur" :thumbup:

 

[inTempus]

The notion that Nikon doesn't have front/back focusing issues seems to be disproved by this Google search.

People have also made "focus charts" specifically for Nikon bodies, apparently in an effort to determine which lens/body in your collection might need service. From the creator of the focus chart test linked to above:

There are many things that can cause this problem and almost all of them can be chalked up to operator error. Occasionally though, the camera and/or lens is to blame and that’s what this test is for.

Digging around the internet you'll find threads like this one on DPReview where people diss the D90 for it's lack of "micro-adjustment". If Nikon were free of such issues, why would people be calling for it? If it was unnecessary, why would Nikon also include micro-adjustment functionality on their D300, D700 and D3 bodies?

As for which company makes superior lenses, neither can lay claim to the best overall lens quality/IQ across their product line. Both companies have killer lenses and both have not so impressive offerings. Opinions vary wildly on this topic and you can easily find people out there that claim Canon has the lead or that Nikon does. Certainly Nikon's 24-70 is known as one of the best lenses out there. They are also known for their wide angle lenses. Canon is known for the super telephotos, offering of affordable f/4 lenses (something Nikon lacks), and their primes.

There are no absolutes. But there are lots of choices. Carefully weigh the pros and cons and make a decision that best suits you. Either way, you're getting a world class camera system.

 

[Montana]

^ well said, and I agree.

 

[Atlas77]

wow, I only got one email for this thread then I looked at it and I was suprised.

Thanks InTempus, great info.

Basically I was right, Im probally going to be at henrys this weekend deciding and holding the bodies. Glass is another story though.

Its too bad if I go Canon, I was set on Nikon for so long that ive done so much research and know a lot more about nikon than canon. But I dont have much money for a lens right now I'd like to say I max out at about 500$ lens but more realistically I max out at the high 300's. I'll probally have to make a whole other thread for glass. Im willing to go used for glass though, and save myself some money.

In reviews ive heard that Canon is marketing high mega pixels (15.1) and in result the T1i has lost camera quality. But then Ive heard the video mode is way better than the Nikon, but meh who cares about video on dslrs? Also ive read that the sensor size on the T1i is much bigger than the Nikon.

I just looked at samples on DP review. I find they dont do much justice for the cameras.

I wish I had the cash to buy a D90 body, I saw a used body on ebay for 600$ (sounds like a scam but is legit) and I really wanted to jump on it but Im not sure about the bodies and by the time I get the money the Nikon will be long gone.

But glass over body right? might as well get a good body and some good glass than get a really nice body and crap glass.

 

[inTempus]

Atlas,

If you have your heart set on Nikon you should go Nikon. At the level you're looking at buying lenses ($300-$500 range) you have lots of offerings and the price difference between Canon and Nikon at that level is negligible. You can also look at 3rd party lenses from Tamron and Sigma too.

If your gut says Nikon, go Nikon. You don't want to switch down the road as it will cost more later.

 

[PhotoXopher]

A lot of people start off with a kit (body + lens) and add good glass as they see fit, that way they know what range they use most often.

I don't regret going that route myself... but everyone is a little different on that topic. The nice thing about Nikon is that you can use essentially every lens made for them. Some may not meter or autofocus on some bodies (D40/D60/D3000/D5000), but they'll work. If you don't mind manual focusing you can pick up a nice 50mm f/1.8D Nikon lens for right around $100 and have a solid staple lens in your kit.